Thanks, but I didn't mean to imply that we should use today's standards to judge yesterday's actions. What I meant to ask was whether the rules would prohibit something similar today.

Jabin said:

---

Thanks for sharing that info. It's very interesting.

Would those rules make our fire bombings of Tokyo, Dresden, and Hamburg illegal today, not to say anything about Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

---

Does it matter in regards to Hamas today?

What you pointed out was a total war. Using this logic It would be like asking was the Rape of Nanking, the concentration camps, the SS murdering captured US POWs at the battle of the Bulge, and the Bataan Death March, were legal. Uh wow lets think about that one. No.....The actions of the Axis made our response legal.

TheBonifaceOption said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

TheBonifaceOption said:

---

So we can kill journalists now? Wow....Bibi is a lil Putin.

---

This might be the stupidest post ever posted on here, and that's really saying something

---

As a BQ do you know the ROEs regarding medics and civilians?

---

F the ROE.

Jabin said:

---

Thanks, but I didn't mean to imply that we should use today's standards to judge yesterday's actions. What I meant to ask was whether the rules would prohibit something similar today.

---

Ok, better.

But the answer is when the great powers get involved in a total war the rules will diminish or will become the will of the victor/winner.

Spotted Ag said:

---

TheBonifaceOption said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

TheBonifaceOption said:

---

So we can kill journalists now? Wow....Bibi is a lil Putin.

---

This might be the stupidest post ever posted on here, and that's really saying something

---

As a BQ do you know the ROEs regarding medics and civilians?

---

F the ROE.

---

It was at that moment the cries of "war crimes" was drown out by western hypocrisy.

TheBonifaceOption said:

---

So we can kill journalists now? Wow....Bibi is a lil Putin.

---

Start a thread when we actually get journalists.

Jabin said:

---

Thanks, but I didn't mean to imply that we should use today's standards to judge yesterday's actions. What I meant to ask was whether the rules would prohibit something similar today.

---

Hard to say other than no...and...yes. Circumstances (as others have pointed out) would decide what action to take. I know, and have personally done, strike planning that takes Collateral Damage Assessment vs Target Value into account and have seen them cancelled even though they were legit military targets.

With todays weapons, carpet bombing and nukes would obviously only be used in the most exigent or unique circumstances. The tech of WWII and the ability to surgically target opponent war industry dispersed among the civilian community didn't really exist.

Proportionality isn't really a consideration in total war.

Only a truly intelligent person would claim that a "journalist" actively taking part in terrorist attack should be classified as a civilian.

CNN is a CIA business….CIA shares information with MOSSAD…..curious how many people actually believe this "surprise " attack was any kind of a surprise at all?

Quote:

---

Proportionality isn't really a consideration in total war.

---

First, I agree with your post, net, just want to note that this whole talking point ("muh, proportionality") is absurd.

When they put your infant child, put him/her in an oven and bake it, in front of the mother, then decapitate it, what sort of 'well you should only respond proportionally' makes any semblance of logic to someone who isn't an absolute islamomarxist nazi?

It's as insane as an assertion I read elsewhere that Israel is "bombing civilians/children indiscriminately."

Bad words.

Savrola said:

---

Guys,

Note that these are contract journalists. Literally idiots who answered a CNN want ad in Gaza to contribute content.

I'm as anti-CNN as it gets, but as of this story, there is no evidence that CNN knew or approved. These are locals, think of them almost as volunteer bloggers, that CNN hired because they probably know any western journalist they sent to Gaza would be killed.

The question is whether or not CNN was aware and still used any of this content. That would be extremely disgusting and possibly could result in criminal action against the network if it did so, because Hamas has been recognized by this government as a foreign terrorist organization since the 1990s (under Clinton). Don't get me wrong, CNN is guilty of horrible journalistic malpractice for hiring people without vetting, but that is not the same as knowing these people would do this ahead of time. If it comes out that they did in fact know them, nail them to the wall and put major CNN high-ups on trial for aiding and abetting terrorism.

---

This seemed fairly apparent to me from the start, that these were freelance/stringers hired by Western outlets in the past who most likely didn't have staff they could even send in to Gaza. It certainly shows that CNN and other outlets did a piss poor job of vetting the contract people they did hire. However, it is entirely probable CNN et. al hired them because they claimed to have Hamas contacts.

nortex97 said:

---

Quote:

---

Proportionality isn't really a consideration in total war.

---

First, I agree with your post, net, just want to note that this whole talking point ("muh, proportionality") is absurd.

When they put your infant child, put him/her in an oven and bake it, in front of the mother, then decapitate it, what sort of 'well you should only respond proportionally' makes any semblance of logic to someone who isn't an absolute islamomarxist nazi?

It's as insane as an assertion I read elsewhere that Israel is "bombing civilians/children indiscriminately."

Bad words.

---

Agree. My wife. My child. My family. My friends.

I would kill everyone I could get my hands on to finish it. It would be wrong and I know I would hate myself later, but......

fka ftc said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

TheBonifaceOption said:

---

So we can kill journalists now? Wow....Bibi is a lil Putin.

---

This might be the stupidest post ever posted on here, and that's really saying something

---

I have not looked into the circumstances, but did these guys participate or simply observe? The reason journalists / press are given a pass is they are there to observe. That often involves embedding with the "enemy".

If they did anything other than hold a camera or take notes, then they are no longer a journalist and should be treated as an enemy combatant.

---

Did you not see the photo of the photographer holding a grenade?

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

TheBonifaceOption said:

---

So we can kill journalists now? Wow....Bibi is a lil Putin.

---

I'm absolutely amazed actual adults can come up with the kind of shallow stupidity quoted here.

I would say you should be embarrassed but I'm not sure you have the mental horsepower to know why.

---

Killing civilians adjacent to enemies is acceptable, as collateral damage.

Targeting civilians adjacent to enemies is a war crime.

The key factor that determines intelligence is discerning a difference. This thread is about Israel crossing a line that no one in the West would dare cross.

It is foolishness to make this statement about targeting journalists who handle weapons, because then it's obvious they, the journalist, has pierced the veil that provides them with legal protections and crossed them over to combatants. Riding along with other combatants to an attack is not participation. Israel is saying that any foreknowledge of an attack should immediately be signaled to the IDF through Professor Xaviers Cerebro, apparently, otherwise the journalist is culpable. It's complete nonsense.

Quote:

---

Perhaps more disturbing was the possibility that the U.S. news organizations they were working for knew what was going on. On that front, both the AP and CNN put out statements categorically denying they were told what was going to happen. They also severed ties with the "photojournalists" in question.

---

I would like to know what they knew and when then knew it.

I'm sure the didn't know any specifics about the size and scope of the attacks, but if they were aware (at any level) prior to the attacks that some Hamas activity directed towards Israel was going to happen and did nothing, that is incredibly damning.

They can't hide behind the notion it might have been flower deliveries for all they knew; terrorists do terrorism first and foremost.

Also, what other things have these "photojournalists" provided to these organizations in the past?

88planoAg said:

---

Those of you referring to this as a military action need to gtfo. Putting babies in ovens is not akin to anything other than Nazi concentration camps. These attackers were not military. And those who stood by and took pics of that-I'm glad they are now on a list.

---

Exactly, and there are no civilians in Gaza. The population there is either Hamas, actively supports Hamas (but aren't members), or tacitly supports them. The few who don't are just tragic causalities of the war Hamas started.

To quote Arthur "Bomber" Harris when asked about bombing Nazi Germany, "They sowed the wind, and now they are going to reap the whirlwind." Israel would be completely justified in napalming or glassing the entire Gaza Strip.

bonfarr said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

TheBonifaceOption said:

---

So we can kill journalists now? Wow....Bibi is a lil Putin.

---

This might be the stupidest post ever posted on here, and that's really saying something

---

I have not looked into the circumstances, but did these guys participate or simply observe? The reason journalists / press are given a pass is they are there to observe. That often involves embedding with the "enemy".

If they did anything other than hold a camera or take notes, then they are no longer a journalist and should be treated as an enemy combatant.

---

Did you not see the photo of the photographer holding a grenade?

---

Do you and the other posters above, I already said I did not look at the particular circumstances of the photos / photographer in question and I would posit that most true journalists would not hold any sort of weapon or ammunition in covering a war as it would be against their "code" or "ethics".

Whole bunch of you guys want to flame at me and completely ignore what I wrote. For a refresher…

If they did anything other than hold a camera or take notes, then they are no longer a journalist and should be treated as an enemy combatant.

But people want to be emotional chest thumpers and billy internet badass and blow every one up forgetting we live in a modern society. What people are saying is that any journalist caught with Hamas should be terminated. Go for it. Hamas will not differentiate between civilian, child and IDF - that is quite evident.

But when you start acting like the terrorists, things will just get quite a bit more messy. Again, read what I originally wrote, what was provided above regarding ROE and see that I am on the same page.

Did cnn aid and abet the attacking journo ?

fka ftc said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

TheBonifaceOption said:

---

So we can kill journalists now? Wow....Bibi is a lil Putin.

---

This might be the stupidest post ever posted on here, and that's really saying something

---

I have not looked into the circumstances, but did these guys participate or simply observe? The reason journalists / press are given a pass is they are there to observe. That often involves embedding with the "enemy".

If they did anything other than hold a camera or take notes, then they are no longer a journalist and should be treated as an enemy combatant.

---

Did you not see the photo of the photographer holding a grenade?

---

Do you and the other posters above, I already said I did not look at the particular circumstances of the photos / photographer in question and I would posit that most true journalists would not hold any sort of weapon or ammunition in covering a war as it would be against their "code" or "ethics".

Whole bunch of you guys want to flame at me and completely ignore what I wrote. For a refresher…

If they did anything other than hold a camera or take notes, then they are no longer a journalist and should be treated as an enemy combatant.

But people want to be emotional chest thumpers and billy internet badass and blow every one up forgetting we live in a modern society. What people are saying is that any journalist caught with Hamas should be terminated. Go for it. Hamas will not differentiate between civilian, child and IDF - that is quite evident.

But when you start acting like the terrorists, things will just get quite a bit more messy. Again, read what I originally wrote, what was provided above regarding ROE and see that I am on the same page.

---

Come on man...You have to know that some folks on here are just looking at everything in black and white. Context isn't needed, nor is knowledge of things that might have some nuance or complexity. Read, assume, judge.

Put a little 1 samuel 15:3 on them

Kudlow is going over this now. It does appear more and more that these guys were indeed well-positioned and appear to be pro-Hamas, though the kissing pic with the Hamas leader may be suspect.

Again, if they knew truly what Hamas was planning and said nothing and then actively participated even in a manner that seems journalistic but was for propaganda purposes, then they are just like any other soldier.

But this thread is another "any association with Gaza and Palestine means you are Hamas or near-Hamas and you must be eliminated. I understand why people are angry enough to say such things, but it's certainly not going to solve long term turmoil over there.

There are more than a few on TexAgs that would be perfectly fine walking up to all Muslims in the world and telling them to repent or face the sword. See the Israel/Hamas form Another Perspective thread for reference.

Muslem Journalists.. AKA Hamas supporters.